eyewitness testimony Flashcards
What are the factors affecting EWT?
Misleading info
Leading Questions
Post Event Discussion
Anxiety
How does misleading info affect EWT?
information given to someone as part of a question that may change the way they perceive a situation or event
How do leading questions impact the accuracy of EWT?
It is argued that the question does not impact our memory of an actual event, but influences how we decide to answer a question on an event
Who researched into the impact of misleading info on EWT?
Loftus and Palmer (1974)
What was Loftus and Palmer (1974)’s aim?
To investigate the effects of misleading info on EWT
What was Loftus and Palmer (1974)’s procedure?
45 student participants were shown 7 short video clips of cars colliding. They were split into 5 groups of 9, and asked ‘How fast were the cars going when they __________ each other? Each group was given a different verb to fill in the blank. These verbs were smashed, collided, bumped, hit or contacted.
What were Loftus and Palmer (1974)’s results?
When the verb ‘smashed’ was used, participants estimated the car to be travelling much faster than when ‘contacted’ was used
Mean speed estimates were as follows:
Smashed - 40.8
Collided - 39.3
Bumped - 38.1
Hit - 34.0
Contacted - 31.8
What was Loftus and Palmer (1974)’s conclusion?
How the question was phrased influenced the participants speed estimates
Who researched into the impact of leading questions on EWT?
Loftus and Zanni (1975)
What was Loftus and Zanni (1975)’s aim?
To investigate the impact of leading questions on EWT
What was Loftus and Zanni (1975)’s aim?
Participants were 100 university students and were all informed they were completing a study on memory. They were shown a 1 minute film of a multiple car crash, and were then asked either:
Did you see the broken headlight?
Did you see a broken headlight?
What were Loftus and Zanni (1975)’s results?
The following percentages claimed to have seen a broken headlight:
Did you see the broken headlight? 17%
Did you see a broken headlight? 7%
What was Loftus and Zanni (1975)’s conclusion?
The changing of a simple word as part of a leading question can impact participants recall?
How does post event discussion impact EWT accuracy?
Conversations after the event can have a similar effect to leading questions as false information can be added in where people can mistake other’s memories for their own
Who researched into the impacts of post event discussion on EWT?
Gabbert et al (2003)
What was Gabbert et al (2003)’s aim?
To investigate the impact of post event discussion on EWT
What was Gabbert et al (2003)’s procedure?
Sample consisted of 60 students from the university of Aberdeen and 60 older adults recruited from a local community. P’s watched a video of a girl stealing from a wallet. P’s were either tested individually (control) or in pairs (co-witness group). P’s in co-witness group were told they had watched the same video, but had actually seen different perspectives and only one person had actually witnessed the girl stealing. P’s in co witness group then discussed the crime together before completing a questionnaire testing their recall of the event
What were Gabbert et al (2003)’s findings?
They found that 71% of witnesses in the co witness group had recalled information they had not actually seen, and 60% said the girl was guilty despite the fact they had not seen her commit a crime
What was Gabbert et al (2003)’s conclusion?
These results highlight the issue of post event discussion and the powerful effect this can have on the accuracy of EWT
How can anxiety impact the accuracy of EWT?
Anxiety has strong emotional and physical effects, and causes tension, worry and physical changed such as increased blood pressure. Anxiety can be good and bad for EWT, and is explained by the Yerkes-Dodson Law. This law dictates that performance increases with physiological or mental arousal, but only up to a certain point before it decreases
Who researched into the impacts of anxiety on EWT?
Loftus (1979)
What was Loftus (1979)’s aim?
To investigate into the effects of anxiety on EWT
What was Loftus (1979)’s procedure?
Participants heard a discussion in a room nearby and then the following happened depending on the condition P’s were in
Condition A - A man walked out the room with a pen and grease on his hands
Condition B - A man walked out the room carrying a knife covered in blood
Participants were then asked to identify the man from 50 photographs
What were Loftus (1979)’s results?
Condition A - 49% accurate at identifying the man
Condition B - 33% accurate at identifying the man
What was Loftus (1979)’s conclusion?
When anxious and aroused, witnesses focus on a weapon at the expense of other details
What was Christianson and Hubinette (1993)’s aim?
To investigate the effects of anxiety on EWT from a naturalistic experiment
What was Christianson and Hubinette (1993)’s procedure?
They interviewed 110 people who had previously witnessed bank robberies. Some were only witnesses while some had even been threatened
What were Christianson and Hubinette (1993)’s results?
Those who had actually been threatened had the best recall of events
What was Christianson and Hubinette (1993)’s conclusion?
When we are more anxious in a situation, EWT is better
Strengths of EWT
Research has useful real life applications - impacted the way questions have been asked as part of the legal system
Much of this has been linked to the cognitive interview - improves P’s recall so must have an impact
Lab experiments - researchers were able to control variables
Limitations of EWT
Tasks are artificial and therefore may not be appropriate to generalise to real life, findings of the anxiety studies may be down to their ecological validity
Other factors play a role in EWT such as gender as people of a similar gender to the criminal may have better recall, as well as age with younger having better recall
Demand characteristics may have played a role - P’s could be attentive to the crime scene before the experiment begins. In real life people who witness a crime most likely won’t be looking for one. Therefore, if people know they are being tested this could give unrealistic results.
